Legal professionals unknowingly breaching client privilege by using ChatGPT, Claude and Gemini, discussion paper finds
Quillio
Key Facts:None of ChatGPT Enterprise, Claude Team/Enterprise or Gemini in Google Workspace processes an Australian law firm's client data onshore
NSW Law Society, VLSBC and WA Legal Practice Board warned firms in December 2024 to review AI contract terms, not just check for "no training" claims
A US federal judge and a UK Upper Tribunal have already ruled that AI uploads can strip away confidentiality and privilege
Clients are pasting confidential matter details into public chatbots before they even engage a lawyer, exposing firms to risk before they are retained
Quillio's 12-page discussion paper sets out ten questions firms should put to any AI vendor, including Quillio itself
Quillio founder warns firms that an enterprise plan is not the confidentiality review regulators asked for, as overseas courts start treating AI uploads as disclosure.
SYDNEY, 8 September 2026. None of the three major general-purpose enterprise AI subscriptions, ChatGPT Enterprise, Claude Team and Enterprise, and Gemini in Google Workspace, processes an Australian law firm's client material in Australia, according to a discussion paper released today by Australian legal AI company Quillio. The paper, authored by founder and CEO Samuel Junghenn, checked each vendor's published residency and retention terms and found that "no training" commitments leave the questions that bear on confidentiality unanswered: where prompts are processed, how long they are retained, who can read them, and whether foreign legal process can reach them.
The finding matters because Australian regulators have already put the burden on firms. The December 2024 joint statement of the Law Society of NSW, the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner and the Legal Practice Board of WA says lawyers cannot safely enter confidential client information into public AI chatbots, and that firms using commercial AI tools with any client information need to review the contractual terms carefully. Quillio's paper argues that many firms have done the first and skipped the second.
"The conversation I keep having with partners is that they bought the enterprise plan, the vendor said it doesn't train on their data, and they think the confidentiality question is closed," Mr Junghenn said. "It isn't. ChatGPT Enterprise can store Australian content at rest in Australia but processes it offshore. Claude's workspaces are US-based. Google Workspace offers the US or the EU. If a firm has never asked where its client's affidavit is actually processed, it has assessed training, not confidentiality, and that is not what the regulators asked for."
Courts overseas have begun to treat AI uploads as disclosure. In the United States, a federal judge in February 2026 rejected privilege claims over documents a defendant had prepared using a general-purpose AI tool, finding no reasonable expectation of confidentiality given the platform's terms. In the United Kingdom, an Upper Tribunal held that uploading confidential documents into an open AI tool such as ChatGPT places the information in the public domain. Two 2025 Australian appellate decisions have warned that systems which store, collate or replicate information may put confidentiality, and therefore privilege, at risk. Separately, OpenAI was ordered in 2025 to preserve every consumer ChatGPT log, including deleted ones, and to produce 20 million de-identified logs in copyright litigation, over its own privacy objections.
The paper, Enterprise AI Is Not a Privilege Guarantee, is written as a discussion paper rather than advice. It sets out the legal obligations that apply, a product-by-product table of what each subscription tier does with client information, the difference between data residency and sovereignty under the US CLOUD Act, ten questions a firm can put to any AI vendor, including Quillio, and the client-side risk that arises when clients paste a firm's advice into public tools. A companion article, Uploading client material to ChatGPT, Claude or Gemini? The confidentiality rule you may already be breaching, is published at quillio.au.
The paper and article are available at quillio.au. Mr Junghenn is available for interview.
ENDS
About Quillio: Quillio is an Australian-owned legal AI platform built by lawyers and used by more than 230 law firms across Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. It is the official AI training partner of the ACT Bar Association and holds ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II certification. Its security and data-handling position is published at security.legalassistant.au. quillio.au
Media contact: Samuel Junghenn, Founder and CEO, Quillio. [email protected]
Notes to editors: The discussion paper (12 pages) and the companion article are available on request ahead of publication under embargo. The principal vendor residency and retention claims were checked against OpenAI, Anthropic and Google documentation as at 2 September 2026; all vendor claims are cited in the paper's source register. Bec Robertson, Quillio COO and a dual-qualified lawyer with 26 years in practice, is available to discuss the professional-conduct obligations. Case references: United States v Heppner (SDNY, 17 February 2026); In re OpenAI Inc Copyright Infringement Litigation (SDNY, production order affirmed 5 January 2026); Helmold & Mariya (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC1A 163; Mertz & Mertz (No 3) [2025] FedCFamC1A 222; UK Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) decision on open AI tools and privilege, 2026, as reported by Norton Rose Fulbright (9 April 2026) and the Law Gazette (30 March 2026).
About us:
Quillio is an Australian-owned legal AI platform built by lawyers and used by more than 230 law firms across Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. It is the official AI training partner of the ACT Bar Association and holds ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type II certification. Its security and data-handling position is published at security.legalassistant.au. quillio.au
Contact details:
Samuel Junghenn, Founder & CEO, Quillio